Travelling France » Eiffel Tower » OT: CIA Warned Bush — No WMDs in Iraq
Question:
Bush’s desire for war with Iraq predated 9/11. It was only a matter of time, and 9/11 gave him a window of opportunity. In order to fool much of the American public, and whip them into a war-frenzy that allowed him to achieve his goal, he simply used cherry-picked "intelligence." Including "intelligence" that some advisors told him was flawed. No matter, he got what he wanted. I’ve been saying this since before the invasion. I expect more and more evidence will surface as time progresses. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > CIA Warned Bush of No Weapons in Iraq > Reuters > Saturday 22 April 2006 > Washington – The CIA had evidence Iraq possessed no weapons of mass > destruction six months before the 2003 US-led invasion but was ignored by a > White House intent on ousting Saddam Hussein, a former senior CIA official > said according to CBS. > Tyler Drumheller, who headed CIA covert operations in Europe during the > run-up to the Iraq war, said intelligence opposing administration claims of > a WMD threat came from a top Iraqi official who provided the US spy agency > with other credible information. > The source "told us that there were no active weapons of mass > destruction programs," Drumheller said in a CBS interview to be aired on > Sunday on the network’s news magazine, "60 Minutes." > "The (White House) group that was dealing with preparation for the Iraq > war came back and said they were no longer interested," he was quoted as > saying in interview excerpts released by CBS on Friday. > "We said: ‘Well, what about the intel?’ And they said: ‘Well, this > isn’t about intel anymore. This is about regime change’," added Drumheller, > whose CIA operation was assigned the task of debriefing the Iraqi official. > He was the latest former US official to accuse the White House of > setting an early course toward war in Iraq and ignoring intelligence that > conflicted with its aim. > CBS said the CIA’s intelligence source was former Iraqi Foreign > Minister Naji Sabri and that former CIA Director George Tenet delivered the > information personally to President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick > Cheney and other top White House officials in September 2002. They rebuffed > the CIA three days later. > "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming and they were looking > for intelligence to fit into the policy," the former CIA agent told CBS. > US allegations that Saddam had WMD and posed a threat to international > security was a main justification for the March 2003 invasion. > A 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, to which the CIA was a major > contributor, concluded that prewar Iraq had an active nuclear program and a > huge stockpile of unconventional weapons. > No such weapons have been found, however, and US assertions that they > existed are now regarded as a hugely damaging intelligence failure. > But Drumheller, co-author of a forthcoming book entitled "On the Brink: > How the White House Has Compromised American Intelligence," rejects the > notion of an intelligence failure. > "It just sticks in my craw every time I hear them say it’s an > intelligence failure," he told CBS. "This was a policy failure." > ——-
Response:
On the other hand, give just about anyone 12 years, and they could single handedly dismantle the Eiffel tower and hide it.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Bush’s desire for war with Iraq predated 9/11. It was only a matter of > time, and 9/11 gave him a window of opportunity. In order to fool much > of the American public, and whip them into a war-frenzy that allowed him > to achieve his goal, he simply used cherry-picked "intelligence." > Including "intelligence" that some advisors told him was flawed. No > matter, he got what he wanted. > I’ve been saying this since before the invasion. I expect more and more > evidence will surface as time progresses. > CIA Warned Bush of No Weapons in Iraq > Reuters > Saturday 22 April 2006 > Washington – The CIA had evidence Iraq possessed no weapons of mass > destruction six months before the 2003 US-led invasion but was ignored by a > White House intent on ousting Saddam Hussein, a former senior CIA official > said according to CBS. > Tyler Drumheller, who headed CIA covert operations in Europe during the > run-up to the Iraq war, said intelligence opposing administration claims of > a WMD threat came from a top Iraqi official who provided the US spy agency > with other credible information. > The source "told us that there were no active weapons of mass > destruction programs," Drumheller said in a CBS interview to be aired on > Sunday on the network’s news magazine, "60 Minutes." > "The (White House) group that was dealing with preparation for the Iraq > war came back and said they were no longer interested," he was quoted as > saying in interview excerpts released by CBS on Friday. > "We said: ‘Well, what about the intel?’ And they said: ‘Well, this > isn’t about intel anymore. This is about regime change’," added Drumheller, > whose CIA operation was assigned the task of debriefing the Iraqi official. > He was the latest former US official to accuse the White House of > setting an early course toward war in Iraq and ignoring intelligence that > conflicted with its aim. > CBS said the CIA’s intelligence source was former Iraqi Foreign > Minister Naji Sabri and that former CIA Director George Tenet delivered the > information personally to President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick > Cheney and other top White House officials in September 2002. They rebuffed > the CIA three days later. > "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming and they were looking > for intelligence to fit into the policy," the former CIA agent told CBS. > US allegations that Saddam had WMD and posed a threat to international > security was a main justification for the March 2003 invasion. > A 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, to which the CIA was a major > contributor, concluded that prewar Iraq had an active nuclear program and a > huge stockpile of unconventional weapons. > No such weapons have been found, however, and US assertions that they > existed are now regarded as a hugely damaging intelligence failure. > But Drumheller, co-author of a forthcoming book entitled "On the Brink: > How the White House Has Compromised American Intelligence," rejects the > notion of an intelligence failure. > "It just sticks in my craw every time I hear them say it’s an > intelligence failure," he told CBS. "This was a policy failure." > ——-
Response:
Have an acquaintance who was actualy one of the inspectors, ( of course he’s not gonna say too much on the subject ) but could not help but ask anyway about a year ago. Basically said everyone knew ( past admin as well ) the stuff was there( actual amounts may never be known ), things that were found were and will NOT for some time if ever be of knowledge to youmeus…..for the most part as you would expect he said Iyouus should be prepared to ponder this forever lol. So our individual answers are still dependant on which side Iyouanyone is "dyed in the wool" towards. After all it is human nature to seehear what we wish to seehear. Most do not have the ability to separate issues, it’s either all for all against a particular prezadminwhat have you. I learned more from a personal friend who will be coming back in June. We are both white water kayakers, so in an early email, trying to keep on the lighthearted side, I asked him " Hey, they let you do any boating over there?" His reply was they are instructed right away upon arriving in Iraq to stay away from ANY moving water what so ever. Supposedly most of the weapons grade chemicals not already in place in a delivery system, were traveled around and dispersed into any river or stream in an attempt to "dilute" evidence, guess sadam and the boys never watched CSI? Those waters will be "HOT" for a long time to come. Can you imagine an environmentalist movement there? As I said, I doubt any of us will ever know the full story, but that is as history dictates……choose your own versions and wail away.
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->On the other hand, give just about anyone 12 years, and they could single >handedly dismantle the Eiffel tower and hide it. > But you’d think that the CIA could find the Eiffel tower after three years. >> Bush’s desire for war with Iraq predated 9/11. It was only a matter of >> time, and 9/11 gave him a window of opportunity. In order to fool much >> of the American public, and whip them into a war-frenzy that allowed him >> to achieve his goal, he simply used cherry-picked "intelligence." >> Including "intelligence" that some advisors told him was flawed. No >> matter, he got what he wanted. >> I’ve been saying this since before the invasion. I expect more and more >> evidence will surface as time progresses. >> > CIA Warned Bush of No Weapons in Iraq >> > Reuters >> > Saturday 22 April 2006 >> > Washington – The CIA had evidence Iraq possessed no weapons of mass >> > destruction six months before the 2003 US-led invasion but was ignored >by a >> > White House intent on ousting Saddam Hussein, a former senior CIA >official >> > said according to CBS. >> > Tyler Drumheller, who headed CIA covert operations in Europe during >the >> > run-up to the Iraq war, said intelligence opposing administration claims >of >> > a WMD threat came from a top Iraqi official who provided the US spy >agency >> > with other credible information. >> > The source "told us that there were no active weapons of mass >> > destruction programs," Drumheller said in a CBS interview to be aired on >> > Sunday on the network’s news magazine, "60 Minutes." >> > "The (White House) group that was dealing with preparation for the >Iraq >> > war came back and said they were no longer interested," he was quoted as >> > saying in interview excerpts released by CBS on Friday. >> > "We said: ‘Well, what about the intel?’ And they said: ‘Well, this >> > isn’t about intel anymore. This is about regime change’," added >Drumheller, >> > whose CIA operation was assigned the task of debriefing the Iraqi >official. >> > He was the latest former US official to accuse the White House of >> > setting an early course toward war in Iraq and ignoring intelligence >that >> > conflicted with its aim. >> > CBS said the CIA’s intelligence source was former Iraqi Foreign >> > Minister Naji Sabri and that former CIA Director George Tenet delivered >the >> > information personally to President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick >> > Cheney and other top White House officials in September 2002. They >rebuffed >> > the CIA three days later. >> > "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming and they were >looking >> > for intelligence to fit into the policy," the former CIA agent told CBS. >> > US allegations that Saddam had WMD and posed a threat to >international >> > security was a main justification for the March 2003 invasion. >> > A 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, to which the CIA was a major >> > contributor, concluded that prewar Iraq had an active nuclear program >and a >> > huge stockpile of unconventional weapons. >> > No such weapons have been found, however, and US assertions that >they >> > existed are now regarded as a hugely damaging intelligence failure. >> > But Drumheller, co-author of a forthcoming book entitled "On the >Brink: >> > How the White House Has Compromised American Intelligence," rejects the >> > notion of an intelligence failure. >> > "It just sticks in my craw every time I hear them say it’s an >> > intelligence failure," he told CBS. "This was a policy failure." >> > ——-
Response:
Yep – more direct evidence that Bush lied us into war. Mr Soul
Response:
>Bush’s desire for war with Iraq predated 9/11. It was only a matter of >time, and 9/11 gave him a window of opportunity. In order to fool much >of the American public, and whip them into a war-frenzy that allowed him >to achieve his goal, he simply used cherry-picked "intelligence." >Including "intelligence" that some advisors told him was flawed. No >matter, he got what he wanted. >I’ve been saying this since before the invasion. I expect more and more >evidence will surface as time progresses.
Liberal’s desires to impeach Bush predated the Iraq war. It was only a matter of time, and Iraq gave them a window of opportunity. In order to fool much of the American public, and whip them into a anti-Bush frenzy that will allow them to achieve their goal, they simply used cherry-picked "news reports". Including "news reports" that some Right-wingers told them were from Liberal sources. No matter, they are getting what they wanted at the price of ruining our country. I’ve been saying this since before the last election. I expect more and more evidence will surface as time progresses. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> CIA Warned Bush of No Weapons in Iraq > Reuters > Saturday 22 April 2006 > Washington – The CIA had evidence Iraq possessed no weapons of mass
Response:
> Yep – more direct evidence that Bush lied us into war.
More INFERENCING by you. As you well know after the many posts, the CONSENSUS at the CIA was that Saddam had WMD’s, BECAUSE HE DID have WMD’s. The Inspectors had found them after the Cease-Fire Agreement was signed and as one of the terms, Saddam had to destroy the WMD’s and provide PROOF of that destruction. That was NEVER done. As you know, every major Intel Agency in the World knew of WMD’s in Iraq. As you know, Tenet told Bush that finding the WMD’s was a "Slam Dunk". I hate to bother you with these facts, but maybe if they are posted enough times, they will begin to sink in.
Response:
>Defend your lying dummy if you must… watch it for yourself if you missed >the show last night: >http://movies.crooksandliars.com/60-Minutes-Tyler.mov
What, a "cherry picked" video by you? No thanks. I haven’t listened to anything CBS has to say since they were caught trying to sabotage Dubya’s campaign a couple years ago. They’re the joke of the industry and you’re a joke for watching.
Response:
>Yep – more direct evidence that Bush lied us into war. >Mr Soul
With no vote from Kerry and his lying ilk there would have been no war. Baby want bottle?
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Have an acquaintance who was actualy one of the inspectors, ( of course > he’s not gonna say too much on the subject ) but could not help but ask > anyway about a year ago. Basically said everyone knew ( past admin as well ) > the stuff was there( actual amounts may never be known ), things that were > found were and will NOT for some time if ever be of knowledge to > youmeus…..for the most part as you would expect he said Iyouus should > be prepared to ponder this forever lol. So our individual answers are still > dependant on which side Iyouanyone is "dyed in the wool" towards. After > all it is human nature to seehear what we wish to seehear. Most do not > have the ability to separate issues, it’s either all for all against a > particular prezadminwhat have you. > I learned more from a personal friend who will be coming back in June. We > are both white water kayakers, so in an early email, trying to keep on the > lighthearted side, I asked him " Hey, they let you do any boating over > there?" His reply was they are instructed right away upon arriving in Iraq > to stay away from ANY moving water what so ever. Supposedly most of the > weapons grade chemicals not already in place in a delivery system, were > traveled around and dispersed into any river or stream in an attempt to > "dilute" evidence, guess sadam and the boys never watched CSI? Those waters > will be "HOT" for a long time to come. Can you imagine an environmentalist > movement there? As I said, I doubt any of us will ever know the full story, > but that is as history dictates……choose your own versions and wail away.
So Grip – does that mean that our President has knwingly exposaed our troops to HOT Water??????? without telling them???? So what you are also saying is that our troops have been irradiated and have been drinking, swimmming in and pissing into hot water. Very interestink. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >On the other hand, give just about anyone 12 years, and they could single > >handedly dismantle the Eiffel tower and hide it. > But you’d think that the CIA could find the Eiffel tower after three > years. > >> Bush’s desire for war with Iraq predated 9/11. It was only a matter of > >> time, and 9/11 gave him a window of opportunity. In order to fool much > >> of the American public, and whip them into a war-frenzy that allowed > him > >> to achieve his goal, he simply used cherry-picked "intelligence." > >> Including "intelligence" that some advisors told him was flawed. No > >> matter, he got what he wanted. > >> I’ve been saying this since before the invasion. I expect more and > more > >> evidence will surface as time progresses. > >> > CIA Warned Bush of No Weapons in Iraq > >> > Reuters > >> > Saturday 22 April 2006 > >> > Washington – The CIA had evidence Iraq possessed no weapons of > mass > >> > destruction six months before the 2003 US-led invasion but was > ignored > >by a > >> > White House intent on ousting Saddam Hussein, a former senior CIA > >official > >> > said according to CBS. > >> > Tyler Drumheller, who headed CIA covert operations in Europe > during > >the > >> > run-up to the Iraq war, said intelligence opposing administration > claims > >of > >> > a WMD threat came from a top Iraqi official who provided the US spy > >agency > >> > with other credible information. > >> > The source "told us that there were no active weapons of mass > >> > destruction programs," Drumheller said in a CBS interview to be aired > on > >> > Sunday on the network’s news magazine, "60 Minutes." > >> > "The (White House) group that was dealing with preparation for > the > >Iraq > >> > war came back and said they were no longer interested," he was quoted > as > >> > saying in interview excerpts released by CBS on Friday. > >> > "We said: ‘Well, what about the intel?’ And they said: ‘Well, > this > >> > isn’t about intel anymore. This is about regime change’," added > >Drumheller, > >> > whose CIA operation was assigned the task of debriefing the Iraqi > >official. > >> > He was the latest former US official to accuse the White House of > >> > setting an early course toward war in Iraq and ignoring intelligence > >that > >> > conflicted with its aim. > >> > CBS said the CIA’s intelligence source was former Iraqi Foreign > >> > Minister Naji Sabri and that former CIA Director George Tenet > delivered > >the > >> > information personally to President George W. Bush, Vice President > Dick > >> > Cheney and other top White House officials in September 2002. They > >rebuffed > >> > the CIA three days later. > >> > "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming and they were > >looking > >> > for intelligence to fit into the policy," the former CIA agent told > CBS. > >> > US allegations that Saddam had WMD and posed a threat to > >international > >> > security was a main justification for the March 2003 invasion. > >> > A 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, to which the CIA was a > major > >> > contributor, concluded that prewar Iraq had an active nuclear program > >and a > >> > huge stockpile of unconventional weapons. > >> > No such weapons have been found, however, and US assertions that > >they > >> > existed are now regarded as a hugely damaging intelligence failure. > >> > But Drumheller, co-author of a forthcoming book entitled "On the > >Brink: > >> > How the White House Has Compromised American Intelligence," rejects > the > >> > notion of an intelligence failure. > >> > "It just sticks in my craw every time I hear them say it’s an > >> > intelligence failure," he told CBS. "This was a policy failure." > >> > ——-
Response:
Did you listen or read the 60 minutes report – http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/04/21/60minutes/main1527749.shtml? "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy." The CIA had a Iraqi double-agent inside Saddam’s regime who said that Iraq didn’t have an active WMD program. Where have you been? Mr Soul
Response:
Now what’s your problem Kenny boy? Mr Soul
Response:
> Liberal’s desires to impeach Bush predated the Iraq war
Nope. You’re an idiot.
Response:
> > Yep – more direct evidence that Bush lied us into war. > More INFERENCING by you.
Nope. More direct evidence.
Response:
that sadam and boys were not trying to mix up a nice summer drink?
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Have an acquaintance who was actualy one of the inspectors, ( of course > he’s not gonna say too much on the subject ) but could not help but ask > anyway about a year ago. Basically said everyone knew ( past admin as well ) > the stuff was there( actual amounts may never be known ), things that were > found were and will NOT for some time if ever be of knowledge to > youmeus…..for the most part as you would expect he said Iyouus should > be prepared to ponder this forever lol. So our individual answers are still > dependant on which side Iyouanyone is "dyed in the wool" towards. After > all it is human nature to seehear what we wish to seehear. Most do not > have the ability to separate issues, it’s either all for all against a > particular prezadminwhat have you. > I learned more from a personal friend who will be coming back in June. We > are both white water kayakers, so in an early email, trying to keep on the > lighthearted side, I asked him " Hey, they let you do any boating over > there?" His reply was they are instructed right away upon arriving in Iraq > to stay away from ANY moving water what so ever. Supposedly most of the > weapons grade chemicals not already in place in a delivery system, were > traveled around and dispersed into any river or stream in an attempt to > "dilute" evidence, guess sadam and the boys never watched CSI? Those waters > will be "HOT" for a long time to come. Can you imagine an environmentalist > movement there? As I said, I doubt any of us will ever know the full story, > but that is as history dictates……choose your own versions and wail away. > So Grip – does that mean that our President has knwingly exposaed our > troops to HOT Water??????? without telling them???? So what you are > also saying is that our troops have been irradiated and have been > drinking, swimmming in and pissing into hot water. Very interestink. > > >On the other hand, give just about anyone 12 years, and they could single > > >handedly dismantle the Eiffel tower and hide it. > > But you’d think that the CIA could find the Eiffel tower after three > years. > > >> Bush’s desire for war with Iraq predated 9/11. It was only a matter of > > >> time, and 9/11 gave him a window of opportunity. In order to fool much > > >> of the American public, and whip them into a war-frenzy that allowed > him > > >> to achieve his goal, he simply used cherry-picked "intelligence." > > >> Including "intelligence" that some advisors told him was flawed. No > > >> matter, he got what he wanted. > > >> I’ve been saying this since before the invasion. I expect more and > more > > >> evidence will surface as time progresses. > > >> > CIA Warned Bush of No Weapons in Iraq > > >> > Reuters > > >> > Saturday 22 April 2006 > > >> > Washington – The CIA had evidence Iraq possessed no weapons of > mass > > >> > destruction six months before the 2003 US-led invasion but was > ignored > > >by a > > >> > White House intent on ousting Saddam Hussein, a former senior CIA > > >official > > >> > said according to CBS. > > >> > Tyler Drumheller, who headed CIA covert operations in Europe > during > > >the > > >> > run-up to the Iraq war, said intelligence opposing administration > claims > > >of > > >> > a WMD threat came from a top Iraqi official who provided the US spy > > >agency > > >> > with other credible information. > > >> > The source "told us that there were no active weapons of mass > > >> > destruction programs," Drumheller said in a CBS interview to be aired > on > > >> > Sunday on the network’s news magazine, "60 Minutes." > > >> > "The (White House) group that was dealing with preparation for > the > > >Iraq > > >> > war came back and said they were no longer interested," he was quoted > as > > >> > saying in interview excerpts released by CBS on Friday. > > >> > "We said: ‘Well, what about the intel?’ And they said: ‘Well, > this > > >> > isn’t about intel anymore. This is about regime change’," added > > >Drumheller, > > >> > whose CIA operation was assigned the task of debriefing the Iraqi > > >official. > > >> > He was the latest former US official to accuse the White House of > > >> > setting an early course toward war in Iraq and ignoring intelligence > > >that > > >> > conflicted with its aim. > > >> > CBS said the CIA’s intelligence source was former Iraqi Foreign > > >> > Minister Naji Sabri and that former CIA Director George Tenet > delivered > > >the > > >> > information personally to President George W. Bush, Vice President > Dick > > >> > Cheney and other top White House officials in September 2002. They > > >rebuffed > > >> > the CIA three days later. > > >> > "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming and they were > > >looking > > >> > for intelligence to fit into the policy," the former CIA agent told > CBS. > > >> > US allegations that Saddam had WMD and posed a threat to > > >international > > >> > security was a main justification for the March 2003 invasion. > > >> > A 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, to which the CIA was a > major > > >> > contributor, concluded that prewar Iraq had an active nuclear program > > >and a > > >> > huge stockpile of unconventional weapons. > > >> > No such weapons have been found, however, and US assertions that > > >they > > >> > existed are now regarded as a hugely damaging intelligence failure. > > >> > But Drumheller, co-author of a forthcoming book entitled "On the > > >Brink: > > >> > How the White House Has Compromised American Intelligence," rejects > the > > >> > notion of an intelligence failure. > > >> > "It just sticks in my craw every time I hear them say it’s an > > >> > intelligence failure," he told CBS. "This was a policy failure." > > >> > ——-
Response:
but if this is true then our president sent our troops over there to wade in nukular water. Kind of not nice of him to do that. Especially since he’s cutting veteran’s benefits so when they all get cancer…. In an announcement today can be read here http://www.vawatchdog.org/… the veterans disability commission has asked Congress for apparently illegal directions. They want to be able to decide if Social Security Disability and Veterans Compensation is "double-dipping" into the federal cash register. What they fail to comprehend is that Social Security disability is paid to people who are totally disabled and paid for by insurance premiums paid for thru payroll taxes, it is not a gift or welfare, it is a paid for insurance policy, like life insurance. VA compensation is paid in percentages based on the injury or medical problem. : Veterans do not get paid a lot of compensation for service related problems, for some injuries they recieve 10% payments which usually equal 106.00 dollars a month, for 50% injuries they get about 806.00 dollars a month, and if they are totally disabled and have a wife and child they get the magnificent sum of 2626.00 a month, now that is in return for compensation for the injury/wounds incurred in service to this nation. If the service member had never been injured how much money he might have made, who knows, 5.25 an hour in a call center, or a lawyer making 300,000 a year? That question can never be answered but does anyone believe a wounded service member getting $31,000 a year is being over compensated? The Veterans Disability Commission is called a bi-partisan committee, yet it is 9-5 republican heavy, is that really a bi-partisan committee, the democrats are going to lose every vote taken. The commissions report is not due out until after the 2006 election in February 2007. Is it so ugly that they do not want to take credit? We can not afford to let Republicans win any seats in November, if you are active duty military or a veteran or related to a veteran, this is a very good reason to vote to oust all republican office holders. "A Promise Made Is A Promise Kept" my azz…….
Response:
> >but if this is true then our president sent our troops over there to >wade in nukular water. > Worrying about the water seems kind of redundant since there is all kind of > dust over there from the uranium-enriched shells… probably more danger > from breathing that than there is in the water.
must all glow in the dark by now http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iraq/index.html
Response:
>>As you well know after the many posts, the CONSENSUS at the CIA was that >Saddam had WMD’s, BECAUSE HE DID have WMD’s. > http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/04/23.html#a8020 > That was not the consensus at the CIA.
PROVE that statement!
Response:
> PROVE that statement!
It’s been all through the news – dumb, dumb. Mr Soul
Response:
More on this story today – http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/22/washington/22intel.html?_r=1&oref=s…. Mike
Response:
>>> That was not the consensus at the CIA. >PROVE that statement! > Did you watch the clip? > Got eyes & ears?
You said that there was NOT a CONSENSUS, and I called you on it! Then it should be easy for YOU to PROVE that there was NO CONSENSUS at the CIA! Step up, or again prove that once again, you are factless and intellectually bankrupt!
Response:
> What the fuck — are you blind and deaf? You call this a "consensus" that > Iraq had WMD?
You made the ignorant claim that there was NOT a consensus at the CIA and you have yet to find a quote that verifies your claim while there HAVE been clips that DO offer quotes of a CONSENSUS at the CIA. One man’s claim does NOT make a consensus, and he does NOT address the issue of consensus. You made the claim, now verify it!
Response:
> It’s fascinating to watch someone who thinks he’s so smart act so > purposely > stupid. What the fuck is the matter with your mind?
I know the meaning of the word consensus, something of which you are obviously ignorant. I just posted quotes > from the head of CIA European office (which you conveniently snipped out > of > your reply) that they had presented the Bush adminstration with very > strong > evidence that Saddam had no WMD. Therefore there was no consensus that he > had them.
Consensus does NOT mean unanimous! There have been many stories posted that have stated that a CONSENSUS at the CIA did believe in Saddam having WMD’s. Just like there have been many stories posted in which Tenet told Bush that finding WMD’s was a "Slam Dunk". You continue to FAIL to verify your claims, but at least you are consistent!
Response:
>>Consensus does NOT mean unanimous! >You continue to FAIL to verify your claims, but at least you are >consistent! > con
no comment untill now